Desert Pearl A British Fraud 8

By December 2009 I had successfully negotiated a possible solution with ER and in respect of DP1 the Abu Dhabi bank. Please note: Mr Philip Morris of Legal Alliances Worldwide Ltd refused to present any information in the Legal Ombudsman investigation of the 29th March 2012, dealing with the Bank of Abu Dhabi or neither did he state a mortgage existed on Desert Pearl One land.

A mortgage of 25 million Egyptian pounds was drawn down on DP1 in favor of the Bank of Abu Dhabi. In the contract of 8th May 2008 the legal firm (LAWL) forwards their clients contracts stating the a due diligence was under take and development DP1 was Freehold.

The Legal Ombudsman and Solicitor Regulatory Authority UK support the legal firms contract ruling in the firms favor. The Legal Ombudsman refuses to deal with the land question but suggest the Irish client's pay further monies for copy of the due diligence. The Legal Ombudsman of Uk also refuses to accept the Denton Wilde Spate Report of June 2009 outlining the fact that a mortgage exists on DP1.

Below we see:

Para 1 - My firm did not do the first due diligence checks on ER projects. There were other due diligence checks carried out by other lawyers well before any buyer instructed my firm. My firm carried out its due diligence on the DP1 in March 2008 by which time most of the apartments on that development- had already been sold.- My firm's due diligence was not carried out for ER it was carried out for clients.

(1) Due Diligence report was apparently undertaken in March 2008. For many clients Egypt in 2008 was not technological friendly all land registry documentation was held in paper archives throughout Egypt. Therefore it is quite a stretch of ones imagination to believe all conveyance document were obtained and analysis in seven weeks to allow the Irish clients purchase their apt in early May 2008.

(2) The legal firm claim that the undertook the due diligence not for clients of ER (El Riad) but for their own company client. What is quite astonishing is that at the central to the Legal Ombudsman investigation 2011-12 the legal firm refuses to present a copy of the clients due diligence to them. The legal firm claims the due diligence is their property. The legal received all it fees therefore the client had already purchased the due diligence report but were denied the information. The Legal Ombudsman UK supports the legal firm claiming they had undertook the study before the Irish client had commenced purchasing their property on DP1. One of the Legal Ombudsman UK recommendations is the Irish client contribute to the legal firms cost for undertaken the study. Here the Irish clients are refused their due diligence and are insulted by the Ombudsman that they contribute to the firms purse, yet the legal firm can not account for large sum of monies had gone that was forwarded to the legal firm. The Legal Ombudsman shows pure prejudice and refuses to assist the Irish client on this matter.

Solicitor Regulatory Authority refuse to act.

To lodge a complaint contact: enquiries@legalombudsman.org.uk